Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/ ... /#comments" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You’ll recall that last year someone hacked into the Astros’ “Ground Control” database, which is the internal communication and evaluation system. Among the stolen data — which was subsequently posted online — were internal discussions about a possible trade for Giancarlo Stanton last year, the leadup to the Bud Norris trade and discussions between the Astros and Yankees in which the Yankees offered Ichiro Suzuki to Houston for cash. Not the sort of stuff a team wants public.

Now, according to an exclusive report in the New York Times, the FBI has a suspect. The Best Suspect in Baseball:


Investigators have uncovered evidence that Cardinals officials broke into a network of the Houston Astros that housed special databases the team had built, according to law enforcement officials . . . The officials did not say which employees were the focus of the investigation or whether the team’s highest-ranking officials were aware of the hacking or authorized it. The investigation is being led by the F.B.I.’s Houston field office and has progressed to the point that subpoenas have been served on the Cardinals and Major League Baseball for electronic correspondence

CitGrad spin job in 3...2...1...

Watch the fed drop the hammer on the responsible parties…but continue to completely ignore all the other hacking going on by the chinks.

First A-Rod and now the Cardinals organization is filled with cheaters. Wonder how far back the Cardinals have been doing this? Normally when you get caught it's not your first time doing it, just your last time. Probably have to start putting some asterisks next to Cardinals seasons going back quite a way.

Cheaters.

There is no evidence that this was initiated, sanctioned or condoned by the Cardinals organization. There is also no evidence that this occurred more than once. There is no evidence that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is, however, evidence that the Astros GM stole proprietary technology from the Cardinals when he left the Cardinals organization and joined the Houston Astros.

By the way, Cardinals won their fifth consecutive game today, improving their record to 43-21. It was a 3-2 win over the Twins.

CitadelGrad wrote:There is no evidence that this was initiated, sanctioned or condoned by the Cardinals organization. There is also no evidence that this occurred more than once. There is no evidence that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is, however, evidence that the Astros GM stole proprietary technology from the Cardinals when he left the Cardinals organization and joined the Houston Astros.

By the way, Cardinals won their fifth consecutive game today, improving their record to 43-21. It was a 3-2 win over the Twins.

Did you copy and paste one of your JoePa posts?

CitadelGrad wrote:There is no evidence that this was initiated, sanctioned or condoned by the Cardinals organization. There is also no evidence that this occurred more than once. There is no evidence that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is, however, evidence that the Astros GM stole proprietary technology from the Cardinals when he left the Cardinals organization and joined the Houston Astros.

By the way, Cardinals won their fifth consecutive game today, improving their record to 43-21. It was a 3-2 win over the Twins.

The article said investigators have uncovered evidence that this was done by Cardinals officials. You have anything that suggests this isn't true?

Yeah, it was done by Cardinal employees. I'm not denying that. However, there is no evidence that the GM or ownership initiated the hacking, knew about it or condoned it. Do you have anything to suggest otherwise?

CitadelGrad wrote:Yeah, it was done by Cardinal employees. I'm not denying that. However, there is no evidence that the GM or ownership initiated the hacking, knew about it or condoned it. Do you have anything to suggest otherwise?

It is still illegal whether done by low level or the top level. I think an investigation is being done right now to see who knew. Not sure anyone knows how high or low it went at this point.

Cardinals=Cheaters=Criminals

What a blow for a once proud organization.

CitadelGrad wrote:Yeah, it was done by Cardinal employees. I'm not denying that. However, there is no evidence that the GM or ownership initiated the hacking, knew about it or condoned it. Do you have anything to suggest otherwise?

No, but the word "officials" suggests it wasn't a groundskeeper. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

dbackjon wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:There is no evidence that this was initiated, sanctioned or condoned by the Cardinals organization. There is also no evidence that this occurred more than once. There is no evidence that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is, however, evidence that the Astros GM stole proprietary technology from the Cardinals when he left the Cardinals organization and joined the Houston Astros.

By the way, Cardinals won their fifth consecutive game today, improving their record to 43-21. It was a 3-2 win over the Twins.

Did you copy and paste one of your JoePa posts?

His next post certainly sounds like it.

cards are CHEATERS!!!
Best part is they cheated against one of the worst teams (at the time) in the MLB.

The word "cheat" implies that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is no evidence the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage.

Does the name, Jeff Luhnow mean anything to you? He may actually be guilty of a crime, as he may have taken proprietary technology from the Cardinals to the Astros. The word in St. Louis is the hacking was done to see exactly what he stole from the Cardinals and took to the Astros.

CitadelGrad wrote:The word "cheat" implies that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage.

No, it doesn't imply that. It does imply that the Cardinals tried to gain a competitve advantage. Under your definition, cheating is only cheating if you're successful. It's still cheating, whether it works or not. Oh, and the Cardinals are cheaters.

CitadelGrad wrote:The word "cheat" implies that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage. There is no evidence the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage.

Does the name, Jeff Luhnow mean anything to you? He may actually be guilty of a crime, as he may have taken proprietary technology from the Cardinals to the Astros. The word in St. Louis is the hacking was done to see exactly what he stole from the Cardinals and took to the Astros.

That is still illegal and there are better (and legal) ways to handle that. Instead, whoever hacked (and those who were accessories) would also be guilty of a crime.

would that we could get the feds as wound up over the recent biggest espionage coup in history by the Chinese like folks are wound up over a baseball team doing it

GannonFan wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:The word "cheat" implies that the Cardinals gained a competitive advantage.

No, it doesn't imply that. It does imply that the Cardinals tried to gain a competitve advantage. Under your definition, cheating is only cheating if you're successful. It's still cheating, whether it works or not. Oh, and the Cardinals are cheaters.

Well, when I buy mulligans at a golf tournament, I only count them as "used" if I actually improve my position on the golf course with one...same thing, right?

AZGrizFan wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
No, it doesn't imply that. It does imply that the Cardinals tried to gain a competitve advantage. Under your definition, cheating is only cheating if you're successful. It's still cheating, whether it works or not. Oh, and the Cardinals are cheaters.

Well, when I buy mulligans at a golf tournament, I only count them as "used" if I actually improve my position on the golf course with one...same thing, right?

Who do you think you are that you would not need to use your mulligans? Tiger ... I mean Phil ... fine I mean Rory or Jordan Spieth?

tribe_pride wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Well, when I buy mulligans at a golf tournament, I only count them as "used" if I actually improve my position on the golf course with one...same thing, right?

Who do you think you are that you would not need to use your mulligans? Tiger ... I mean Phil ... fine I mean Rory or Jordan Spieth?

I don't get the favorable rulings that Tiger gets on the golf course...

AZGrizFan wrote:

tribe_pride wrote:
Who do you think you are that you would not need to use your mulligans? Tiger ... I mean Phil ... fine I mean Rory or Jordan Spieth?

I don't get the favorable rulings that Tiger gets on the golf course...

If only you were transcablanasian

dbackjon wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I don't get the favorable rulings that Tiger gets on the golf course...

If only you were transcablanasian

'zatly.